On Tuesday, President-elect Donald Trump reportedly said that he would think about employing “economic force” to buy Canada and military force to seize Greenland and the Panama Canal.
A reporter asked Trump, during a free-flowing news conference at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, if he could guarantee the public that he would not employ military coercion against Greenland or Panama, a goal he has hinted at in recent weeks.
“No, I can’t assure you on either of those two, but I can say this, we need them for economic security,” Trump responded.
He recently joked that it ought to become the 51st state, and on Tuesday, he claimed to have made a joke about becoming “governor” with Wayne Gretsky, the nation’s most renowned hockey player.
Amid party infighting over his handling of Trump and the 25% tariffs that Trump has pledged to implement, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ten-year mandate ended abruptly on Monday.
Trump reiterated his ambition to buy Greenland, an Arctic island that is part of Danish territory, last month, citing a strategic interest for the U.S. in doing so since winning the 2024 presidential election.
For Trump, this is hardly a novel concept: When the idea of buying Greenland was floated during his first term in government, it was ridiculed.
Donald Trump Jr., his oldest son, was on the ground Tuesday with at least two new White House officials, filming a documentary.
Earlier in the day, Trump invited Trump Jr. to a luncheon on the island in a video that was shared on social media.
Trump asserted that Panama is in “violation” of an agreement with the United States and that the United States is treated unfairly when it is charged greater charges than other nations for its ships to sail the Canal.
Trump claimed that despite “China basically taking it over,” Panama has asked the United States for $3 billion to assist restore the canal. He’s said he’ll try to retract it.
[READ MORE: Biden Awards Medal of Freedom to George Soros]
well if the MIC needs a war, how about one in Greenland or Panama to keep them busy? At least we can get a net gain out of it instead of the total loss in Afgh over 20 years….